By Linda winsh-Bolard
Even before Kate Middleton could lay any claim to a tiara, she was watched, commented on and dissected by the media to the point of stupor. Myths were created.
As she never actually did anything, apart from firmly attaching herself to a rich, powerful man, this is remarkable.
Let’s start with the most prevalent myth: Kate Middleton is middle class, so middle class she is” practically an American”. You kidding me, right? Mr. Middleton, Kate’s Dad, is very, very wealthy, so wealthy that he paid for extremely expensive private education of a daughter who never intended to do anything except marry well. No doubt, the Middletons regarded Kate’s education as an investment, sort of like the debutante season, only longer, as Kate was looking for suitable provider. It paid off handsomely, Price William is not short of a bob. Dad ico-pay for the wedding is $200,000, Kate uncle is multimillionaire and she spends freely while contributing nothing.As middle class as Trump.
Then there are the “remarkable” women on Kate’s Mom side. Those women actually never did anything except marry up. Perhaps that is remarkable as means of escape, but hardly admirable. I prefer people to use their intellect rather than their sexual attributes to better their lives. Intellect lasts longer (Diana versus Camilla).
Let's look at looks. Kate Middleton is pleasantly ordinary, tall woman with somewhat heavy thighs, beautifully groomed hair and excellent orthodontists. Yet, many men describe this middle of the road looking woman as ravishing. Why?
Remember the media flurry about Lady Diana of Spencer’s looks? As a girl,I actually suffered a shock seeing that the pinacle of beauty of the 80s was thin, large bosomed, long nosed and had small, bleached out eyes. Diana must have been acutely aware of this. In all her photos she inclines her head to “shorten the nose “ , kind like the trick Marlene Dietrich used so well, while her eyes were first shielded by her hair and later masterly enhanced by make-up. Diana used what she had, and everybody kept quiet about the growing waist line.
Is this necessary? Sarah Ferguson, the dark eyed, plump red head captured Prince Andrew’s heart securely and put the media in twist as claiming that Sarah was a great beauty was nearly impossible. Clearly, she was fun ( a bit too much of fun), witty, pleasant and strong headed. It made Prince Andrew happy, as it should any man.
This is the crux of the problem: if even a born prince is not be able to hook the paragon of female beauty, whose other characteristics are meek love for her man, loyalty, faithfulness, obedience and endless support, who can?
For thousands of years men were assured that mere possession of penis gives them special rights. It entitles them to the best in all, including mates. Since the sixties, it also absolves them from all responsibility. Having penis and money is supposed to be the ticket to endless string of young beauties, number of adorable children and no need to take responsibility of any part of the family, not to mention shady financial deals.
However, if princes marry, and stay, with ordinary women, what happens to the entitlement? Is the aging seladon out of the game? The young buck no longer able to pick and discards beauties at will? Is something like equality creeping in?
Not possible, not allowed. It would diminish the entitlement of all penises.
Should men born to power and money “settle” down with women looking like women rather than like computer generated models, then these women will be proclaimed unsurpassed beauties (and their pictures corrected by photoshop) in order to keep the entitlements in and the ax of “not good enough “ over the heads of all females.
Don’t you dare to question the beauty of those who marry up. You question the entitlements of men in power. That is not allowed, little woman. You are just envious because you are not pretty enough. To the nunnery with you.